I find myself somewhat bemused by the actions of some European, and Arab governments, in introducing legislation designed to ban the wearing of the Niqaab or veil in public places. I completely understand their ‘fear’ and note all the reasons proffered for running the campaign against them by certain categories of politicians. However, such a degree of disregard for the feelings of others can only be seen as a ‘ganging up’ by these governments against a minority of people, who, whilst they do not intend to do any harm to anyone, feel that their wearing of these garments is based on valid personal and long standing religious reasons.
In introducing this ban Governments have even acted illegally against the charters of their own constitutions by failing to protect and defend the rights of their citizens. Even foreign visitors and tourists, it seems, will be banned from wearing the traditional Niqaab, even if it is part of the National dress of their own countries.
It is true that wearing the Niqaab is not universally recognised as an Islamic injunction, nor is it prescribed in the Quran. The wearing of the Niqaab, on the other hand, should be regarded as the signature of a woman who wishes to signify and display her loyalty and her spiritual commitment to her religion. In no way is the wearing of these garments a mark of political extremism or a breakdown of social cohesion. Surely, if wearing it causes no harm to the security of people or places, banning it is a curtailment of everyone’s’ personal liberty and right of choice.
The Niqaab has been worn in the UK, and many other parts of the Western world, for many years prior to the current controversy surrounding it, and was never seen as a political target or an object of fear in these societies. However, since a political dimension, created by anti- Islamic or Islamophobic forces and right wing media has been added to the controversy, it has become unacceptable in society in the name of ‘security’. As a result, the general public has become extremely sensitive towards the issue, and we face more intolerance and misunderstanding from them about this particular issue than on any other subject.
The Burqa is a traditional, but more extreme way of covering women, and is intended to protect them from prying eyes and so uphold their honour, and that of their family.
The Burqa is very much part of the Afghan Culture, and is not normally worn in the UK or anywhere else in the world, except by Afghanis. It existed for centuries before the arrival of the Taliban, and to regard it as a direct result of the Taliban culture, or as an expression of Islamic extremism, is misleading and completely disingenuous. The Taliban are seeking to enforce what they regard as the social norms of their country, but whether we agree with them or not, calling for the wearing of it to be regarded as mandatory in Islam, by the Taliban or by others, would be narrowing down the broader definition of modesty, as set down in the Quran.
The Islamic code of dress for women is not very prescriptive. The Quran first regulates the prying eyes of both men and women; as it seeks purity of hearts and purification of thoughts. It comes amidst the guidance and rulings about fornication and adultery, scandalous slandering of chaste women, and acts of indecency in society by others.
The Qur`an, then, in the given context, advises women to lower their Jilbab onto their bodies so that they are not recognised and harmed. The context is very clearly expressed and there is no need to generalise the appearance.
While it is important for Muslim scholars to support the Islamic spirit of maintaining human dignity and a respectful appearance in both men and women, it would do harm to the spirit of the Islamic teachings if we get into the business of promoting different cultures. We need to explain the Quranic rationale of its teachings and injunctions.
On the other hand, governments, who seek to project themselves as blatantly anti Islamic, in particular in the matters of the Burqa, the Niqaab and even the Minarets, only harm their own reputations, and those of their constitutions, and inflict considerable and lasting damage to their global images. These self inflicted wounds will take a very long time to heal.
